Bibliography Triple Helix of Innovation Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. Triple Helix of Innovation. Rep. 6th ed. Vol. 25. Leydesdorff's Personal Website. Web. 28 Nov. 2011. <http://www.leydesdorff.net/spp98/>.
Henry Etzkowitz is a chair for the management of innovation and creative enterprise at the business school in the University of Newcastle. His work is mostly dedicated to the Triple Helix, which refers to the relationship between University – Industry – Government. The interactions of these three are all affected by and help creative innovation. The central argument made by this paper is that there are different institutions which have different forces which, as they interact, shape the course of innovation. These three areas are government, industry and university. Understanding the relationship between these three forces is key to understanding the shape of innovation. “A triple helix of overlapping yet relatively independent institutional spheres is required to capture contemporary innovation processes. The triple helix model attempts to account for a synthesis between opposing principles in which new resolutions are found that allow several tasks to be accomplished, even as each influences the other.” This quote explains the reason for the existence of this triple helix as well as an explanation of how it operates and creates the innovations in a society. “Scientists from the MIT “Rad Lab,” for example, went into the battlefields as observers on airplanes equipped with radar sets to see how the crews were using them, and they fed their experience back into the designs before the radar sets went into mass production” This is a clear example of how interactions between the branches of the triple helix can provide some benefits during the innovation process. This is crucial because it establishes how these different branches interact. Other interactions, especially when they lead to an imbalance between the three branches, cause all sorts of sustainability problems and that’s why this report is relevant to my research. Understanding the triple helix is necessary to solving some of the sustainability problems that exist in the world. Specifically, there needs to be a specific force that comes in and prevents the triple helix from becoming unbalanced. I believe this force to be the public and I will be basing my sustainability solution on this principle.
Triple Helix Twins: Innovation and Sustainability Etzkowitz, Henry, and Chunyan Zhou. Triple Helix Twins: Innovation and Sustainability. Rep. 1st ed. Vol. 33. Guildford: Beech Tree, 2006. Print. Science and Public Policy.
The authors are social scientists who study the various forces of government, universities and industry as they shape the nature of innovation and technology. They are focusing on how the different ways in which technology manifests itself through our society as well as the intricate and complex relationships between the industry, government and universities. The argument made by these guys is that triple helix model (explained before) does not fit in the model for sustainability and, whilst it may be beneficial for looking at innovation, a different triple helix must be used when looking at sustainability. This new triple helix will also incorporate the public (but removes industry). The idea is that these two triple helixes work in parallel in the world and represent a constantly shifting relationship between the three entities of Government, Public and University. The argument for this second helix is made by explaining that the previous triple helix (the one about innovation) doesn’t account for the public in the model. Adding the public as a fourth branch would create a static entity and is therefore dismissed as not viable. This is when the argument of a second triple helix, one of sustainability, is made. This new triple helix incorporates the views of the public. “Interactions among university – industry – government is the source of origin and/or development of incubator movements, interdisciplinary research centers and venture capital whether private, public or social.” This quote explains the nature of these interactions and shows their relevance to the foundation of our society. “Adding a fourth helix might cause the triadic model to lose its creative dynamic. Nevertheless an expanded concept is required to incorporate the crucial missing dimension. To resolve this paradox, we propose an alternative university – public – government Triple Helix to complement [the original one].” This explains, now only why the public cannot be added as a fourth branch, but also this new Triple helix of sustainability. This is central to the argument made by the author, but I question, doesn’t the public play a much more central role? This is why I used this paper in my research. This attempt to incorporate the public is very different from the approach that I used and that makes for an interesting paradigm. Instead of making a whole second Triple Helix, I integrated the public as a mediator of technology, who decides what is appropriate without actually making innovations. This model is, I believe, a more accurate representation of our society.
Triple Helix of Innovation
Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. Triple Helix of Innovation. Rep. 6th ed. Vol. 25. Leydesdorff's Personal Website. Web. 28 Nov. 2011. <http://www.leydesdorff.net/spp98/>.
Henry Etzkowitz is a chair for the management of innovation and creative enterprise at the business school in the University of Newcastle. His work is mostly dedicated to the Triple Helix, which refers to the relationship between University – Industry – Government. The interactions of these three are all affected by and help creative innovation. The central argument made by this paper is that there are different institutions which have different forces which, as they interact, shape the course of innovation. These three areas are government, industry and university. Understanding the relationship between these three forces is key to understanding the shape of innovation.
“A triple helix of overlapping yet relatively independent institutional spheres is required to capture contemporary innovation processes. The triple helix model attempts to account for a synthesis between opposing principles in which new resolutions are found that allow several tasks to be accomplished, even as each influences the other.”
This quote explains the reason for the existence of this triple helix as well as an explanation of how it operates and creates the innovations in a society.
“Scientists from the MIT “Rad Lab,” for example, went into the battlefields as observers on airplanes equipped with radar sets to see how the crews were using them, and they fed their experience back into the designs before the radar sets went into mass production”
This is a clear example of how interactions between the branches of the triple helix can provide some benefits during the innovation process. This is crucial because it establishes how these different branches interact. Other interactions, especially when they lead to an imbalance between the three branches, cause all sorts of sustainability problems and that’s why this report is relevant to my research. Understanding the triple helix is necessary to solving some of the sustainability problems that exist in the world. Specifically, there needs to be a specific force that comes in and prevents the triple helix from becoming unbalanced. I believe this force to be the public and I will be basing my sustainability solution on this principle.
Triple Helix Twins: Innovation and Sustainability
Etzkowitz, Henry, and Chunyan Zhou. Triple Helix Twins: Innovation and Sustainability. Rep. 1st ed. Vol. 33. Guildford: Beech Tree, 2006. Print. Science and Public Policy.
The authors are social scientists who study the various forces of government, universities and industry as they shape the nature of innovation and technology. They are focusing on how the different ways in which technology manifests itself through our society as well as the intricate and complex relationships between the industry, government and universities. The argument made by these guys is that triple helix model (explained before) does not fit in the model for sustainability and, whilst it may be beneficial for looking at innovation, a different triple helix must be used when looking at sustainability. This new triple helix will also incorporate the public (but removes industry).
The idea is that these two triple helixes work in parallel in the world and represent a constantly shifting relationship between the three entities of Government, Public and University. The argument for this second helix is made by explaining that the previous triple helix (the one about innovation) doesn’t account for the public in the model. Adding the public as a fourth branch would create a static entity and is therefore dismissed as not viable. This is when the argument of a second triple helix, one of sustainability, is made. This new triple helix incorporates the views of the public.
“Interactions among university – industry – government is the source of origin and/or development of incubator movements, interdisciplinary research centers and venture capital whether private, public or social.”
This quote explains the nature of these interactions and shows their relevance to the foundation of our society.
“Adding a fourth helix might cause the triadic model to lose its creative dynamic. Nevertheless an expanded concept is required to incorporate the crucial missing dimension. To resolve this paradox, we propose an alternative university – public – government Triple Helix to complement [the original one].”
This explains, now only why the public cannot be added as a fourth branch, but also this new Triple helix of sustainability. This is central to the argument made by the author, but I question, doesn’t the public play a much more central role? This is why I used this paper in my research. This attempt to incorporate the public is very different from the approach that I used and that makes for an interesting paradigm. Instead of making a whole second Triple Helix, I integrated the public as a mediator of technology, who decides what is appropriate without actually making innovations. This model is, I believe, a more accurate representation of our society.